Draft White Paper 

SC&A’S EVALUATION OF THE WELDON SPRING 

SITE PROFILE CHANGES COMPARED TO 

THE ORIGINAL FINDINGS 

Contract Number 211-2014-58081

Prepared by 

Ron Buchanan 

S. Cohen & Associates 

1608 Spring Hill Road, Suite 400 

Vienna, Virginia 22182 

Saliant, Inc. 

5579 Catholic Church Road 

Jefferson, Maryland 21755

January 2015 

Disclaimer 

This document is made available in accordance with the unanimous desire of the Advisory Board on 

Radiation and Worker Health (ABRWH) to maintain all possible openness in its deliberations. However, 

the ABRWH and its contractor, SC&A, caution the reader that at the time of its release, this report is predecisional and has not been reviewed by the Board for factual accuracy or applicability within the 

requirements of 42 CFR 82. This implies that once reviewed by the ABRWH, the Board’s position may 

differ from the report’s conclusions. Thus, the reader should be cautioned that this report is for 

information only and that premature interpretations regarding its conclusions are unwarranted.
Effective Date:

January 9, 2015

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon Spring Site Profile Changes

Page No.

Page 2 of 16

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

S. Cohen & Associates:

Technical Support for the Advisory Board on

Radiation & Worker Health Review of

NIOSH Dose Reconstruction Program

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon 

Spring Site Profile Changes

Effective Date: 

Draft – January 9, 2015

SC&A’S EVALUATION OF THE WELDON SPRING 

SITE PROFILE CHANGES COMPARED TO

THE ORIGINAL FINDINGS

Page 2 of 16

Task Manager:

____________________________ Date:__________

Ron Buchanan

Supersedes:

N/A

Project Manager:

____________________________ Date:__________

John Stiver, MS, CHP

Reviewers:

 Joe Fitzgerald

 John Stiver, MS, CHP

Record of Revisions

Revision 

Number

Effective 

Date Description of Revision

0 (Draft) 01/09/2015 Initial issue
Effective Date:

January 9, 2015

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon Spring Site Profile Changes

Page No.

Page 3 of 16

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abbreviations and Acronyms ..........................................................................................................4

1.0 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................5

2.0 Relevant Findings ................................................................................................................6

3.0 SC&A Evaluation of Revised TBDs....................................................................................7

3.1 Finding 4: Recycled Uranium Not Adequately Recognized in the TBDs 

[Related SEC Finding #5] ........................................................................................7

3.2 Findings 6, 7, 8, & 9: Occupational Medical X-ray Exam Dose [No Related 

SEC Finding] ...........................................................................................................7

3.3 Finding #14: Stated Uranium/Thorium/Radium/Lead Ratios should be used 

with Caution [No Related SEC Finding] .................................................................8

3.4 Finding #15: Natural Thorium-232 Not Always Negligible [No Related 

SEC Finding] ...........................................................................................................8

3.5 Finding #18: Incomplete Assessment of Uranium Decay Products [No 

Related SEC Finding] ..............................................................................................9

3.6 Finding #20: Different Solubility Classes Listed for Same Element [No 

Related SEC Finding] ..............................................................................................9

3.7 Finding #21: Coworker Data Not Adequately Addressed [SEC-related 

Finding #1d] ...........................................................................................................10

3.8 Finding #25: Shallow and Extremity Doses Not Sufficiently Characterized 

[Related SEC Finding #9] ......................................................................................10

3.9 Finding #27: Lack of Sufficient Coworker Data Development for External 

Dose [Related SEC Finding #1d] ...........................................................................11

4.0 Summary and Conclusions ................................................................................................12

References ......................................................................................................................................13

Appendix A: Weldon Spring Site Profile Findings that Require TBD Changes as of May 

2011....................................................................................................................................15

Appendix B: Weldon Spring SEC Findings that Require TBD Changes as of May 2011 ...........16
Effective Date:

January 9, 2015

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon Spring Site Profile Changes

Page No.

Page 4 of 16

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 

Advisory Board 

or ABRWH Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health 

CER pg. 16

CW coworker 

DR dose reconstruction 

DWE Daily Weighted Exposure 

EU enriched uranium

gU gram uranium 

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 

ORAUT Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team 

ppb parts per billion

RU Recycled Uranium 

SC&A S. Cohen and Associates (SC&A, Inc.) 

SEC Special Exposure Cohort 

TBD Technical Basis Document 

TIB Technical Information Bulletin 

U uranium 

V/V verified and validated 

WG Work Group 

WS Weldon Spring 
Effective Date:

January 9, 2015

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon Spring Site Profile Changes

Page No.

Page 5 of 16

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

SC&A originally identified a number of site profile findings [and sequent Special Exposure 

Cohort (SEC)-related findings] in the Weldon Spring (WS) site profile Technical Basis 

Documents (TBDs). The purpose of this report is to summarize SC&A’s evaluation of the 

recently revised WS TBDs (2013) to determine if they sufficiently reflect the resolutions to the 

findings, as discussed during the numerous WS Work Group (WG) meetings, and analyzed in the 

various white papers issued by NIOSH and SC&A. The most relevant documents to this 

evaluation are: 

 WS site profile TBDs (ORAUT-TKBS-0028-3 through ORAUT-TKBS-0028-6) 

(ORAUT 2005a–d) 

 SC&A’s Site Profile Review (SC&A 2009)

 NIOSH’s Response to SC&A Comments on Weldon Spring Profile (NIOSH 2010b)

 NIOSH’s responses contained in the April 21, 2011, e-mail, with six attachments 

(NIOSH 2011a) 

 NIOSH’s responses to the recycled uranium (RU) issue (NIOSH 2011b) 

 NIOSH’s responses to the Blunders1in Daily Weighted Exposure (DWE) data (NIOSH 

2011c) 

 SC&A’s updated matrix, reply to RU issue, and reply to NIOSH’s 4/21/2011 report 

(SC&A 2011a) 

 SC&A’s Weldon Spring Work Group submission - Data Completeness Issue (SC&A 

2011b). 

 SC&A’s response to Weldon Spring SEC Issue #6 - neutron n/p value (SC&A 2011c). 

 SC&A’s evaluation of NIOSH’s response of September 7, 2011, to DWE Blunders1 in 

Weldon Spring data (SC&A 2011d). 

 The results of WS WG meetings, held October 19, 2010; January 25, 2011; May 9, 2011; 

September 13, 2011; November 29, 2011; February 14, 2012, and September 10, 2012. 

 

1

“Blunder” is a technical term used in the International Organization for Standardization’s Guide to the 

Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (ISO 1995). It refers to mistakes that are not addressed in the statistical 

expression of uncertainty.
Effective Date:

January 9, 2015

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon Spring Site Profile Changes

Page No.

Page 6 of 16

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 

2.0 RELEVANT FINDINGS 

The following table summarizes the relevant findings that were addressed by the WS WG and 

required changes in the WS TBDs: 

Table 1. Summary of Relevant Findings Requiring Changes in WS Site TBDs

Site Profile

Finding

Related SEC 

Finding Relevant TBDs Item

#4 #5 4 & 5 RU

#6, 7, 8, 9 None 3 X-Ray Exams

#14 None 4 U Ratios

#15 None 4 Natural Thorium

#18 None 5 U Decay Products

#20 None 5 Solubility Types

#21 #1d 5 CW Internal Data

#25 #9 6 Exposure Geometry

#27 1d 6 CW External Data
Effective Date:

January 9, 2015

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon Spring Site Profile Changes

Page No.

Page 7 of 16

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 

3.0 SC&A EVALUATION OF REVISED TBDS 

During the numerous WS WG meetings and exchange of white papers, many of the site profile 

(and SEC) findings were resolved. Some of the resolutions required changes, or clarifications, to 

be made in the WS site TBDs. SC&A evaluated sections of the revised (2013) TBDs to 

determine if they adequately reflect the changes necessary to resolve the appropriate findings. A 

condensed summary of the site profile findings (provided in Appendix A) and SEC findings 

(provided in Appendix B) as they stood for the May 9, 2011, WS WG meeting was used as a 

guide to determine which findings required a change, or clarification, in the WS site TBDs. This 

current evaluation was only a focused effort to assess if the intended revisions had been made in 

the TBDs; it did not include a complete re-evaluation of the WS TBDs to determine their 

technical accuracy or applicability to WS. The following is SC&A’s evaluation of the adequacy 

of the revised TBDs in reflecting the required changes. 

3.1 FINDING 4: RECYCLED URANIUM NOT ADEQUATELY RECOGNIZED IN 

THE TBDS [RELATED SEC FINDING #5]

Original Finding 

This finding originated out of the fact that ORAUT-TKBS-0028-4 (ORAUT 2005b) stated on 

page 12 that the environmental dose from RU at WS was not considered significant; and 

ORAUT-TKBS-0028-5 (ORAUT 2005c) contained minimal internal dose reconstruction 

information concerning RU. 

SC&A’s Evaluation of Revisions

SC&A evaluated the changes in the WS TBDs and found that page 11 of ORAUT-TKBS-0028-4 

(ORAUT 2013b) and page 16 of ORAUT-TKBS-0028-5 (ORAUT 2013c) recommend the 

appropriate intakes (i.e., 100 ppb/gU Pu-239, etc.), along with an example for the dose 

reconstructor. 

Current Status 

SC&A concurs that the necessary revisions have been implemented. However, there remains 

one issue, in that TKBS-0028-4 (ORAUT 2013b) pages 11 and 27, and TKBS-0028-5 (ORAUT 

2013c) page 16 state the year to apply RU is “after 1961,” whereas pages 38 and 44 of TKBS0028-5 (ORAUT 2013c) state to apply RU from “1961–1966.” These dates need to match; it 

appears that the term “after 1961” needs to be changed to “after 1960” in the TBDs when 

referring to when to begin to apply RU intakes (otherwise 1 year of RU intakes could be 

mistakenly omitted). 

3.2 FINDINGS 6, 7, 8, & 9: OCCUPATIONAL MEDICAL X-RAY EXAM DOSE [NO 

RELATED SEC FINDING]

Original Findings 

These findings were related to occupational medical x-ray exam issues from the original TKBS0028-3 (ORAUT 2005a) in which NIOSH had recommended methods for determining doses 

from x-ray exams using some of the WS-related data, documents, and procedures. After the 

release of original TBD (ORAUT 2005a), NIOSH had decided that the x-ray exams may have 
Effective Date:

January 9, 2015

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon Spring Site Profile Changes

Page No.

Page 8 of 16

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 

been taken off site and were not to be included in the dose reconstructions; therefore, SC&A’s 

findings were no longer applicable (as indicated in the May 6, 2011, summary of findings 

provided in Appendix A). 

SC&A’s Evaluation of Revisions

With the release of ORAUT-OTIB-0079 in 2011 (ORAUT 2011a), which states on page 5, “If 

there is doubt about where the X-ray exposure was received, dose reconstructors should assume 

that the dose was received at a covered facility” and the fact that WS is listed in Table 2 as a 

“Covered facilities that administered occupational X-rays on site, or for which no evidence exists 

that X-rays were taken off site,” NIOSH has now included assigning occupational medical x-ray 

exam doses as per TKBS-0028-3, Rev. 01 (ORAUT 2013a). Because this revised TBD uses 

approved occupational medical dose reconstruction methods as recommended in ORAUT-OTIB0006 (ORAUT 2011b) (as opposed to limited WS data), SC&A’s original findings for TBD 

(ORAUT 2005a) are no longer applicable. 

Current Status 

The findings can be closed, because the revised TBD makes the original findings no longer 

applicable. 

3.3 FINDING #14: STATED URANIUM/THORIUM/RADIUM/LEAD RATIOS 

SHOULD BE USED WITH CAUTION [NO RELATED SEC FINDING]

Original Finding 

SC&A found that the original TBD (ORAUT 2005b, page 9) assumed that during the operations 

period, Th-230 was 5% of the U-238 activity, Ra-226 was 1% of the U-238 activity, and Pb-210 

was 1% of the U-238 activity. These values may have been applicable for some locations and 

time periods at the WS site; however, this may not have been true for all locations during all time 

periods. 

SC&A’s Evaluation of Revision

The revised TBD (ORAUT 2013b) recognizes on page 10 that the uranium mill processes that 

produced the yellowcake concentrates that were used at both Fernald and WS effectively 

removed the radium, but were not effective in removing thorium; specifically Th-230. 

Therefore, the revised TBD recommends activity ratios for Th-230, Ra-226, and Pb-210 in 

uranium ore concentrate of 80%, 1%, and 1%, respectively, of that of U-238. 

Current Status 

SC&A found that the revised TBD provided the necessary information and recommends that this 

finding be closed. 

3.4 FINDING #15: NATURAL THORIUM-232 NOT ALWAYS NEGLIGIBLE [NO 

RELATED SEC FINDING]

Original Finding 

ORAUT-TKBS-0028-4 (ORAUT 2005b, page 9) assumes that because the amounts of natural 

thorium handled/processed at the WS site were a small fraction of the total uranium material 
Effective Date:

January 9, 2015

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon Spring Site Profile Changes

Page No.

Page 9 of 16

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 

handled and processed, natural thorium is probably not a significant contributor to environmental 

inhalation doses during the operational period. This may be true on average, but this assumption 

does not consider the fact that some workers, or certain groups of workers, may have received a 

substantial portion of their inhalation dose from thorium and its decay products for a significant 

amount of time near a thorium handling process, or from operations that concentrated thorium, 

such as the raffinate pits. 

SC&A’s Evaluation of Revision

The revised TKBS-0028-4 (ORAUT 2013b) provides for intakes of natural thorium in 

Tables 4-1 and 4-2 on pages 20–22. Additionally, the revised TKBS-0028-5 (ORAUT 2013c) 

has an expanded Section 5.2.3 concerning natural thorium at WS. 

Current Status 

SC&A found that the revised TBDs provided the necessary information and recommends that 

this finding be closed. 

3.5 FINDING #18: INCOMPLETE ASSESSMENT OF URANIUM DECAY 

PRODUCTS [NO RELATED SEC FINDING]

Original Finding 

The original discussion in Section 5.5.2 of TKBS-0028-5 (ORAUT 2005c), pages 13–14, 

concerning dose estimates from the decay products of U-238 left some aspects of the process 

incomplete or unclear [e.g., two values (5% and 0.5%) were listed for Th-230, and it was not 

clear which components were included in the doses from Th-234 and Pa-234m]. 

Current Status 

These issues were discussed at the various WS WG meetings and clarification provided. SC&A 

found that the revised TKBS-0028-5 (ORAUT 2013c) Section 5.2.2, page 13, removed the 

reference to the lower values of intakes (i.e., 0.5% Th-230 and 0.1% Ra-226) that appeared in the 

original TBD. In addition, the revised TBD eliminated some of the wording and/or paragraphs 

in Section 5.2.2 that were not needed. The various components of the Th-234 and Pa-234m 

radionuclides are appropriately accounted for during the internal dose analyses. 

Current Status 

SC&A found that the revised TBD provided the necessary information and recommends that this 

finding be closed. 

3.6 FINDING #20: DIFFERENT SOLUBILITY CLASSES LISTED FOR SAME 

ELEMENT [NO RELATED SEC FINDING]

Original Finding 

SC&A found that the original TKBS-0028-5 (ORAUT 2005c) lacked clarification concerning 

the application of the numerous solubility types provided in Section 5.2.5, pages 15 and 16. 
Effective Date:

January 9, 2015

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon Spring Site Profile Changes

Page No.

Page 10 of 16

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 

SC&A’s Evaluation of Revision

The revised TKBS-0028-5 (ORAUT 2013c), page 16, provides wording to clarify the application 

of the numerous solubility types provided. 

Current Status 

SC&A found that the revised TBD provided the necessary information and recommends that this 

finding be closed. 

3.7 FINDING #21: COWORKER DATA NOT ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED [SECRELATED FINDING #1D] 

Original Finding 

SC&A found that the original TKBS-0028-5 (ORAUT 2005c) lacked sufficient instructions for 

the use of coworker doses in Tables 5-8 through Table 5-17 in some cases. 

SC&A’s Evaluation of Revision

The revised TKBS-0028-5 (ORAUT 2013c), page 44, provides for a summary of instruction to 

the dose reconstructor to assist in clarifying the assignment of internal doses. 

Current Status 

SC&A found that the revised TBD provided the necessary information and recommends that this 

finding be closed. 

3.8 FINDING #25: SHALLOW AND EXTREMITY DOSES NOT SUFFICIENTLY 

CHARACTERIZED [RELATED SEC FINDING #9]

Original Finding 

SC&A found that the original TKBS-0028-6 (ORAUT 2005d) did not adequately account for 

geometry factors concerning the placement of the personnel monitoring badges in relationship to 

the origin of the radiation, especially for uranium handlers and glovebox workers. 

SC&A’s Evaluation of Revision

The revised TKBS-0028-6 (ORAUT 2013d), page 30, recommends geometry correction factors 

in accordance with DCAS-TIB-013, page 15, (DCAS 2010) for uranium workers, and DCASTIB-010 (DCAS 2011), Table 1, page 11, for glovebox workers. 

Current Status 

While SC&A found that the revised TBD provided recommendations concerning geometry 

correction factors for uranium workers (DCAS-TIB-013) and glovebox workers (DCAS-TIB010), DCAS-TIB-013 is still in progress and has not yet been fully approved by the Advisory 

Board on Radiation Workers Health (ABRWH) Subcommittee on Procedures Review. 

Therefore, the recommendation for geometry correction factors for uranium workers (using 

DCAS-TIB-013) still remains open until the document is fully approved. 
Effective Date:

January 9, 2015

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon Spring Site Profile Changes

Page No.

Page 11 of 16

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 

3.9 FINDING #27: LACK OF SUFFICIENT COWORKER DATA DEVELOPMENT 

FOR EXTERNAL DOSE [RELATED SEC FINDING #1D]

Original Finding 

SC&A found that there was some lack of clarity for assigning coworker external doses in the 

original TKBS-0028-6 (ORAUT 2005d). 

SC&A’s Evaluation of Revision

The revised TKBS-0028-6 (ORAUT 2013d) provides a revised Table 6-7 (page 19) for the 

average annual external gamma and beta doses by job description, and added Table 6-8 (page 20) 

for the median value of external gamma and beta doses by year; this provides the required 

information. 

Current Status 

SC&A found that the revised TBD provided the necessary information and recommends that this 

finding be closed. 
Effective Date:

January 9, 2015

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon Spring Site Profile Changes

Page No.

Page 12 of 16

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 

4.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

SC&A evaluated the revised WS TBDs to determine if the resolutions reached by the WS WG 

concerning previously identified findings that required TBDs changes were adequately 

implemented in the recently released WS TBDs of 2013. SC&A found that the revised TBDs 

contained the necessary changes to reflect the resolutions to the findings, except for the two 

following items: 

 Finding #4 – Wording concerning the year that RU work began at the WS site (it appears 

that the term “after 1961” needs to be changed to “after 1960” in the TBDs when 

referring to when to begin to apply RU intakes). 

 Finding #25 – The recommendation for geometry correction factors for uranium workers 

(using DCAS-TIB-013) still remains open until DCAS-TIB-013 is approved by the 

ABRWH Subcommittee on Procedures Review.
Effective Date:

January 9, 2015

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon Spring Site Profile Changes

Page No.

Page 13 of 16

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 

REFERENCES 

DCAS. 2010. Technical Information Bulletin: Selected Geometric Exposure Scenario 

Considerations for External Dose Reconstruction at Uranium Facilities, DCAS-TIB-013, 

Rev. 1, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Division of Compensation 

Analysis and Support, Cincinnati, Ohio. November 23, 2010. 

DCAS. 2011. Technical Information Bulletin: Best Estimate External Dose Reconstruction for 

Glovebox Workers, DCAS-TIB-010, Rev. 04, National Institute for Occupational Safety and 

Health, Division of Compensation Analysis and Support, Cincinnati, Ohio. November 28, 2011. 

ISO 1995. Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement, International Organization 

for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland. 

NIOSH 2010b. NIOSH Responses to SC&A Comments on the Weldon Spring Site Profile. 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Office of Compensation Analysis and 

Support, Cincinnati, Ohio. October 12, 2010. 

NIOSH 2011a. NIOSH Responses to Weldon Spring Plant Review – may contain Privacy Act 

information, April 21, 2011, e-mail from Mark Rolfes, with six attachments. National Institute 

for Occupational Safety and Health, Office of Compensation Analysis and Support, Cincinnati, 

Ohio. 

NIOSH 2011b. NIOSH Responses to Weldon Spring Plant Review – may contain Privacy Act 

information, July 1, 2011, e-mail from Mark Rolfes, with one attachment, titled Weldon Spring 

Recycled Uranium Dose Response to ABRWH WG, Rev 00, National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health, Office of Compensation Analysis and Support, Cincinnati, Ohio. 

NIOSH 2011c. NIOSH Responses to Weldon Spring Plant Review – may contain Privacy Act 

information, September 7, 2011, e-mail from Mark Rolfes, with one attachment, titled 

Evaluation of Blunders Associated With Daily Weighted Average (DWE) Reports at the Weldon 

Spring Plant, Rev 00, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Office of 

Compensation Analysis and Support, Cincinnati, Ohio. 

ORAUT 2005a. Weldon Spring Plant – Occupational Medical Dose, ORAUT-TKBS-0028-3, 

Rev. 00, T. Lopez and J. Furman, Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. 

June 24, 2005. 

ORAUT 2005b. Weldon Spring Plant – Occupational Environmental Dose, ORAUT-TKBS0028-4, Rev. 00, L. McDowell-Boyer and C. Little, Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, 

Cincinnati, Ohio. June 28, 2005. 

ORAUT 2005c. Weldon Spring Plant – Occupational Internal Dose, ORAUT-TKBS-0028-5, 

Rev. 00, Janet A. Johnson and Roger B. Falk, Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, 

Cincinnati, Ohio. June 28, 2005. 
Effective Date:

January 9, 2015

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon Spring Site Profile Changes

Page No.

Page 14 of 16

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 

ORAUT 2005d. Weldon Spring Plant – Occupational External Dosimetry, ORAUT-TKBS0028-6, Rev. 00, J. Langsted and C. Little, Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, 

Ohio. June 24, 2005.

ORAUT 2011a. Technical Information Bulletin: Guidance on Assigning Occupational X-Ray 

Dose Under EEOICPA for X-Rays Administered Off Site, ORAUT-OTIB-0079, Rev. 00, Oak 

Ridge Associated Universities Team: Cincinnati, Ohio. January 3, 2011,

ORAUT 2011b. Technical Information Bulletin: Dose Reconstruction from Occupationally 

Related Diagnostic X-ray Procedures, ORAUT-OTIB-0006, Rev. 04, Oak Ridge Associated 

Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. June 20, 2011. 

ORAUT 2013a. Technical Basis Document for the Weldon Spring Plant – Occupational 

Medical Dose, ORAUT-TKBS-0028-3, Rev. 01, Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Oak 

Ridge, Tennessee. January 30, 2013.

ORAUT 2013b. Technical Basis Document for the Weldon Spring Plant – Occupational 

Environmental Dose, ORAUT-TKBS-0028-4, Rev. 01, Oak Ridge Associated Universities 

Team, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. May 17, 2013.

ORAUT 2013c. Technical Basis Document for the Weldon Spring Plant – Occupational 

Internal Dosimetry, ORAUT-TKBS-0028-5, Rev. 02, Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, 

Oak Ridge, Tennessee. May 21, 2013.

ORAUT 2013d. Technical Basis Document for the Weldon Spring Plant – Occupational 

External Dosimetry, ORAUT-TKBS-0028-6, Rev. 01, Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, 

Oak Ridge, Tennessee. February 6, 2013.

SC&A 2009. Review of the NIOSH Site Profile for the Weldon Spring Site in Weldon Spring, 

Missouri, Revision 0. SCA-TR-TASK1-0028, February 10, 2009. 

SC&A 2011a. (1) Issue Matrix, (2) Evaluation of SEC Issue #5 [RU], and (3) Evaluation of 

NIOSH Response and WG Mtg. – Not PA cleared. SCA-TR-TASK5-0015, August 3, 2011. 

SC&A 2011b. Weldon Spring Work Group submission - Data Completeness Issue - Not PA

Cleared. SCA-TR-TASK5-0015, August 15, 2011. 

SC&A 2011c. Weldon Spring SEC Issue #6-neutron n/p value, e-mail from Ron Buchanan. 

SCA-TR-TASK5-0015, September 20, 2011.

SC&A 2011d. SC&A’s Evaluation of NIOSH’s Response of September 7, 2011, to Daily 

Weighted Exposure Blunders in Weldon Spring Data. SCA-TR-TASK5-0015, September 27, 

2011.
Effective Date:

January 9, 2015

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon Spring Site Profile Changes

Page No.

Page 15 of 16

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 

APPENDIX A: WELDON SPRING SITE PROFILE FINDINGS THAT REQUIRE TBD CHANGES 

AS OF MAY 2011 

TKBS

Finding #

SEC

Issue #

SC&A 's Original Concerns Status

P-1 2 Lack of egress monitoring

P-2 3 Lack of data for 1967–1984

P-3 1 Individual vs. average exposures 

S-4 5 RU dates and assignment of Pu intakes need to be addressed 

S-5 8 Accidents/incidents 

S-6, 7, 8, 9 NA X-ray exams records/issues Exams conducted off site - Closed

P-10 4 Lack of atmospheric monitoring for operational period

P-11 4 Insufficient environmental internal data for unmonitored workers

P-12 4 Lack of maximum environmental doses

S-13 4 Lack of sufficient effluent data prior to 1967

S-14 NA Stated U/Th/Ra ratios should be used with caution As of 1/25/2011, NIOSH to issue white paper & TBD revision.

S-15 NA Natural Th-232 not always negligible As of 1/25/2011, NIOSH to issue white paper & TBD revision.

S-16 4 Use of environmental external doses from Fernald data

S-17 4 Episodic releases

P-18 NA Incomplete assessment of uranium decay products As of 1/25/2011, NIOSH to issue white paper & TBD revision.

P-19 4 Radon exposures 

P-20 NA Many different solubility types listed As of 1/25/2011, NIOSH to clarify in TBD revision.

P-21 1a & 1d MDA and coworker data not adequately addressed Coworker in SEC #1d.

S-22 NA Using cost center codes 

S-23 NA Thorium in-vivo counts not reliable 

S-24 NA Verification that EU <1% 

P-25 9 Shallow, geometry, and extremity doses not addressed

P-26 1 Badging not consistent

P-27 1d External dose coworker data development 

S-28 6 Neutron exposures 
Effective Date:

January 9, 2015

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description:

SC&A’s Review of Weldon Spring Site Profile Changes

Page No.

Page 16 of 16

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 

APPENDIX B: WELDON SPRING SEC FINDINGS THAT REQUIRE TBD CHANGES 

AS OF MAY 2011

SEC

Issue #

TKBS

Finding #

Item SC&A 's Original Concerns NIOSH's April 2011 Reply SCA's

Status

1 a & c P-21, 26 V/V of Int/Ext data Accuracy of the data used in DR? CER used?

1 b NA DWE Use of air monitoring data. NA

1 d P-3, 21, 27 Coworker data Sufficient data for CW? Model? Not needed, or will be in revised TBD, or 50%.

2 P-1 Egress monitoring No egress monitors. Cohort bioassays miss intakes.

3 P-2, S-13 1967 No external or bioassay data for 1967. Diff situation.

4 P-10, 11, 12, 19 Radon Equal out/in radon conc & envir model not justified.

S-13, 16, & 17 & thoron Thoron model is vague & not substituted.

5 S-4 RU Start 1961, 1962, 1963? 1 out of 5 DRs got 100ppb TBD

6 S-28 Neutrons 1995 canister neutrons, 2001 drums gammas. 

7 NA Quarry & pits Measured only later & different conditions than oper.

8 S-5 Accidents/Incid. Potential rad accid/incid not always recorded.

9 P-25 Geo/Extremities Beta shielded? Geo & extremities factors? TBD